This ruling is expected to have significant implications for Uganda's military justice system, reinforcing the independence of military courts and delineating their separation from the civilian judicial system.
The Supreme Court has issued a landmark ruling that reaffirms the jurisdictional boundaries between military and civilian courts, essentially barring military personnel tried from appealing their conviction in civil courts.
In a unanimous decision delivered on Wednesday will further arm the military courts at a time they are already taking in so much foul airs about the constitutionality to try civilians.
The Supreme Court is yet to pronounce itself on an appeal by the military court after the Constitutional Court ruled, nearly three years ago, that it did not have the legality to try civilians.
But in Wednesday's ruling, the top-most court in the land ruled that civil courts lack the authority to hear appeals from soldiers tried and convicted by military courts, including the Court Martial.
The ruling, delivered by a five-judge bench led by Professor Lillian Tibatemwa, arose from the case of Lieutenant Ambrose Ogwang, a Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) officer convicted of murder and sentenced to 29 years in prison.
Lt Ogwang sought to overturn his conviction and sentence, but the Supreme Court held that his appeal fell outside the jurisdiction of the civil courts.
The other justices on the panel were Mike Chibita, Catherine Bamugemereire, Christopher Izama Madrama, and Stephen Musota.
The case stemmed from a May 23, 2010, incident in Mbale City, where Ogwang, allegedly during a shop robbery, shot and killed Inspector George William Koire of the Uganda Police Force.
After a prolonged legal battle, Ogwang was tried by the UPDF 3rd Divisional Court Martial, convicted of murder, and sentenced to death.
The sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment by the General Court Martial. Subsequent appeals to the Court Martial Appeal Court upheld the conviction and sentence.
Ogwang then appealed to the Court of Appeal, which overturned his conviction.
However, after a retrial in the High Court resulted in another murder conviction, he attempted to escalate his appeal to the Supreme Court, citing procedural flaws and alleged unfairness during his earlier trials.
Before addressing the appeal's merits, the Supreme Court considered a preliminary objection raised by Chief State Attorney Joseph Kyomuhendo.
Kyomuhendo argued that the appeal was invalid as it contravened the jurisdictional limits established by law.
He asserted that the People's Defence Forces Act, 2005, does not authorize appeals from the Court Martial Appeal Court to the Court of Appeal or any civil court.
The Supreme Court upheld this argument, ruling that civil courts, including the Court of Appeal, have no jurisdiction over military court decisions.
The court noted that the People's Defence Forces Act, 2005, explicitly governs military justice and does not empower civil courts to hear such appeals.
"In this case, the UPDF (Court Martial Appeal Court) Regulations were not designed to infer or confer jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal or any other court without explicit authority from the statute itself," the judgment stated.
"The UPDF Act serves as the 'mother law' for the Uganda People's Defence Forces but does not grant jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal over military court decisions."
The justices further emphasized that any attempt by a minister to extend the appeal scope through regulations was ultra vires--beyond legal authority--and therefore invalid.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
They underscored that the right to appeal is created by statute, and if the legislature intended for civil courts to have jurisdiction over military court rulings, it would have expressly stated so.
Additionally, the Supreme Court clarified that the death penalty confirmation process retains a degree of civilian oversight.
The Law Revision (Penalties in Criminal Matters) Miscellaneous (Amendment) Act of 2019 grants the Supreme Court a supervisory role over death sentences.
The court also declared that existing regulations allowing civil courts to hear appeals on military sentences such as life imprisonment or death were inconsistent with the law, affirming that such cases remain beyond civilian court jurisdiction.
This ruling is expected to have significant implications for Uganda's military justice system, reinforcing the independence of military courts and delineating their separation from the civilian judicial system.
